In this edition of Commission on Accreditation Update, we interview Janay Sander, PhD, educational psychology (specialization in school psychology). A licensed psychologist in Indiana, she has been at Ball State University since 2012, serving as a professor in the department of educational psychology, the director of the Ball State University Internship Consortium in School Psychology, and the director of the School Psychology doctoral program as well as an adjunct research faculty member at the Youth Opportunity Center. Sander currently serves as the chair of the commission.
What sparked your interest in joining the CoA?
I have always found accreditation very interesting. Before I was a program director, I attended the workshops on self-studies and site visitor training, and wanted to learn more, which was very helpful when I became a doctoral program director. I have always been invested in training and want to ensure training programs are helpful to the public by preparing competent practitioners, and to trainees to ensure that they have access to quality programs. I was excited to get involved as a commissioner when the opportunity came up through the Council of Directors of School Psychology Programs, the group that nominated me to fill a seat on the commission.
What was your path to leadership in the CoA and how would you describe your experience?
When I joined the commission, I was almost immediately invited to leadership roles, which I found both daunting and exciting. First, I was informally asked by my peers to be our new cohort representative on the executive committee. I enjoyed that experience and I liked seeing how the between-meetings decisions were made at the executive committee level. In each working meeting on the commission, the process of decision-making was collaborative, yet with room for disagreement and discussion in a highly respectful way, which made it a welcome experience, more than a stressful one. Then, also in my first few months on the commission, I was invited to join the writing group to develop the Master’s Standards of Accreditation. The master’s accreditation group had several seasoned commissioners, but I was the only new person added in my year on the commission, and I had experience with master’s training so it was a good fit for my skills. After a year or so, the other commissioners in that group rotated off the commission, and I ended up chair of the master’s policy group. In my fifth year, I was elected associate chair of quality assurance, then as chair to finish my sixth and final year on CoA. Overall, the path to leadership was in small, mentored roles that led to bigger roles. The former leaders did a great job preparing me for my future roles, which is an intentional aspect of the commission in general, and I am grateful for their mentorship along the way.
What would you like people to know about the CoA?
This is a volunteer role and requires a substantial time commitment. Only people who care deeply about training would do this, due to the heavy time commitment. Being a commissioner is one of the most fulfilling and interesting things I have done professionally. The other commissioners are amazing. Staff is outstanding. This is a unique and diverse group of professionals who are inspiring with their range of expertise, their commitment to training, and their dedication to the accreditation process in health service psychology. Sharing the values of our profession and working with other professionals so generous with their time and talent for a shared purpose has been wonderful. It’s a lot of work, but totally worth it.
Is there something that you were involved in during your time on the commission that you are most proud of?
I joined the commission in January 2020, when the Master’s Standards of Accreditation were being developed. I had the opportunity to help draft those Standards and later the Implementing Regulations, and then to be a part of the Commission when the first master’s programs were accredited. Now, the commission has worked to get approval to expand its scope to the new level of training and is building processes and systems to accept more applicant master’s programs. Being a part of history in expanding accreditation in health service psychology at the master’s level is something I will always look back on with appreciation. It is not a personal achievement, it is a massive group project, but one I am honored to be part of.
What advice would you give to future CoA members?
What you do for the commission is important for the field. This is a special role, and your expertise matters. The role is time-limited and the season will pass quickly, so embrace it. While you are on the commission, do whatever you can to protect your time to allow yourself the necessary bandwidth to focus on program review when the program review meeting cycle arrives. Say no to other professional opportunities that may create time conflicts for you during this commitment, especially for the four weeks prior to program review meetings when you get your assigned programs. Future trainees and programs need your voice and perspective, so remember how important that is. Ask other commissioners lots of questions, they will all be helpful mentors to you.
What will your future hold after your time on the CoA?
At this point, I imagine I will enjoy having a bit of free time when my term ends. I look forward to spending more time oil painting, one of my hobbies. I am open to new leadership or service roles where I can contribute in different ways, but I am not sure what that might look like yet. I will stay connected in new ways to support the commission. It is helpful for former recent commissioners to return and help with program reviews on a limited basis, so I will offer to return to help the commission as a program review consultant if needed. I also will return to the site visitor pool because I enjoy doing that, and site visits are an important step in the accreditation process. Beyond that, I look forward to seeing what new opportunities might come next!
Is there anything else you would like to add?
Our profession is experiencing incredible challenges. I thought that the master’s accreditation process would be the main event of my time on the commission in leadership. I would never have imagined what we are facing instead. From my perspective, the commission’s choices and actions are always thoughtful, and never easy. I have experienced the other commissioners as deeply conscientious individuals who take the responsibility seriously and do everything possible to make the best choice available that will protect programs, students, the public, and the field, and that is what matters at the end of the day. Although the commission is separate from the other functions of the American Psychological Association, primarily psychologists serve as commissioners. We value the same things, despite many difficult choices in this moment in history, and the field needs us all to support each other and the profession now more than ever. For anyone who cares deeply about training and the values of our field, please consider seeking a nomination to serve as a commissioner.